Spoilers Avengers: Infinity War grade and discussion thread

[Spot261]

Um.. you do realise that characters.. grow and change? The Thor of his first viewing is not the same as the one in Infinity War? That is the purpose of an arc.

Change yes, become completely different people no.

An arc can only have semblance of believability if it in some way reflects the normal real world process of character development in a way real people in the audience can relate to.

Thor is slightly wiser, more rounded and self aware but nothing else we have seen has indicated he has (or should be expected to) become any less fundamentally prideful, arrogant and vengeful. Nor have we seen him develop any great strategic skills.

Those character traits are literally what he represents in Norse mythology, he is a walking embodiment of exactly those flaws. It's his literary purpose in that mythology to show exactly those traits.

They carried over consistently into the comics and consequently the MCU. Not one portrayal of him has ever shown him otherwise. Furthermore he literally stated his intent earlier in the film, making it clear exactly how he viewed killing Thanos as being both personal and a matter of pride after Loki's death. He then acted on that stated intent exactly the way he has done throughout the mythology, the comics and the MCU, by letting hubris overcome common sense.

The outcome was exactly the same as every single one on one encounter between the two we have seen in the past (including those within timelines), Thor tried to best him by brute force and failed to realise in his pride that he was destined to fail because Thanos is more than a match for him.

Where in that is there any inconsistency across the story arc or disconnect with the source material?

 

[Refuge]

Do you realize that people also often stay the same, that lasting change rarely comes fast, easily or without momentary regression, that Thor is literally 1500 years old and has only even been trying to better himself for the past 8-10 years, and that he actually has made progress but has also very clearly been shown to still struggle with the same underlying character flaws?

I don't know about lasting change... but Thor has experienced incredible loss. I understand that as God of War he had it in the bag because he was next in line, but he was also groomed for the 'role'. He also had his destiny and the pureness of heart to own the hammer, to own his destiny. He is not just a blonde thug that had everything fall into his lap. There is caring and gosh, some smarts involved.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I don't know about lasting change... but Thor has experienced incredible loss. I understand that as God of War he had it in the bag because he was next in line, but he was also groomed for the 'role'. He also had his destiny and the pureness of heart to own the hammer, to own his destiny. He is not just a blonde thug that had everything fall into his lap. There is caring and gosh, some smarts involved.

There's caring and heart, absolutely. Without those nothing he did in this movie would've ever happened. Without those he never would've been any kind of hero at all.

Smarts... There's enough there to say he's not stupid in the abstract. But he's no smarter or more thoughtful than the average person. And that's exactly what we see in this story.

 

[Refuge]

He then acted on that stated intent exactly the way he has done throughout the mythology, the comics and the MCU, by letting hubris overcome common sense.

I so disagree here. Firstly I'm judging the material from this movie and the movie franchise. Thor has changed and grown throughout the arc he has been portrayed in that led to Infinity War. Common sense? So you agree he failed on 'simple common sense' to facilitate Thanos to dominate and to introduce Captain Marvel?

 

[Spot261]

I so disagree here. Firstly I'm judging the material from this movie and the movie franchise. Thor has changed and grown throughout the arc he has been portrayed in that led to Infinity War. Common sense? So you agree he failed on 'simple common sense' to facilitate Thanos to dominate and to introduce Captain Marvel?

He failed on overweening pride and hubris which led him to want to look Thanos in the eye, have him see who exactly had defeated him, who had exacted his revenge. That, along with simple lack of knowledge as to exactly how much damage Thanos could take.

As for the character arc, where have we seen him develop past those character traits? Where have we seen any evidence that his growth as a character has been that exponential?

 

[Refuge]

He failed on overweening pride and hubris which led him to want to look Thanos in the eye, have him see who exactly had defeated him, who had exacted his revenge. That, along with simple lack of knowledge as to exactly how much damage Thanos could take.

As for the character arc, where have we seen him develop past those character traits? Where have we seen any evidence that his growth as a character has been that exponential?

You avoided answering my question.

 

[Spot261]

You avoided answering my question.

No I didn't, I stated hubris and pride were his undoing, I'd already made the point about common sense.

The common sense, logical thing to do would be to strike, strike again and keep striking until Thanos was prone and then take the gauntlet before he had any chance to recover, revive, reanimate or any other feat of mystical or technological wonder that would make the whole exercise pointless.

What he actually did was exactly what anyone who knows the character would expect him to do, boast unnecessarily and expound on how honour and vengeance had been fulfilled before finding it had all come undone and he had underestimated the danger.

That is exactly in line with every single portrayal of Thor we have ever seen, in the films, in the comics, in the mythology which inspired them.

At the risk of labouring the point, being an embodiment of those traits is literally his purpose in our culture.

Over TOS and the original cast movies we saw Spock go from being completely dismissive of human emotions to becoming more self aware, more capable of predicting and comprehending the value of those emotions. That is growing and learning analogous to what we have seen with Thor, becoming aware of one's own limitations and learning to take them into account.

What you are suggesting from Thor's arc is more akin to (non Pon Farr) Spock ending up wearing emo make up and writing plaintive songs about his lost love whilst refusing to come out of his room for days on end. It isn't character growth, it's simply replacing him with another character altogether.

 

[Booji]

Time to put another idiot on the ignore list. Jesus h Christ...

 

[Neroon]

Time to put another idiot on the ignore list. Jesus h Christ...

Warning for flaming. Comments to PM

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

I posted a piece of dialogue from the movie. Is the script from the wrong movie too?

Posting dialogue, then misinterpreting it to justify bad screenwriting is the brick wall you continue to head-butt.

You playing the "I hate all Marvel movies for reasons" bit is rather tedious. Your excuses just get lazier and lazier. I find your devotion to this bit rather sad. Do you think anyone is buying it anymore? Because they aren't.

Do not confuse me with someone else who lives to trash an entire movie franchise, since innumerable posts exist detailing my support of certain MCU films. Oops. So, falling back on personal attacks & lies when you have no way of supporting your rickety position is intellectual dishonesty (obviously) and a gross display of immaturity, as its clear you will post anything to defend a painfully weak plot device.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Posting dialogue, then misinterpreting it to justify bad screenwriting is the brick wall you continue to head-butt.



Do not confuse me with someone else who lives to trash an entire movie franchise, since innumerable posts exist detailing my support of certain MCU films. Oops. So, falling back on personal attacks & lies when you have no way of supporting your rickety position is intellectual dishonesty (obviously) and a gross display of immaturity, as its clear you will post anything to defend a painfully weak plot device.

You have nothing, absolutely nothing. It's not my fault you didn't understand a fairly simple movie. You're just upset that no one is buying your reasoning. FYI, it's because it's terrible. You really shouldn't blame the movie for your own misinterpretation of events and characters. Everyone else got it, it's just you who doesn't.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

Yep. It's right up there with the Peter punch and Hulk hiding out for the rest of the movie. We all get that Thanos was going to win the day but it still required some serious failings from these seasoned superheroes.

Well put. The failings you refer to is bad screenwriting 101 to have a character with set personality, motive or beliefs to suddenly become stupid (or develop any other failing) all to justify a conclusion and/or set up a sequel. To refer to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan again, Spock--without hesitation--sacrificing himself for all others was in character with not only the running themes of the film, but the way his character was developed over the course of the original TV series. His action did not come out of nowhere just to get to that ending--it made sense and respected character development. That's nowhere to be found in the case of Thor, who hits the mission breaks against a foe posing a threat no one in their right mind would underestimate by failing to kill him with a first strike.

 

[TREK_GOD_1]

You have nothing, absolutely nothing. It's not my fault you didn't understand a fairly simple movie. You're just upset that no one is buying your reasoning. FYI, it's because it's terrible. You really shouldn't blame the movie for your own misinterpretation of events and characters. Everyone else got it, it's just you who doesn't.

Once again, falling back on personal attacks & lies when you have no way of supporting your rickety position is intellectual dishonesty and a gross display of immaturity, as its clear you will post anything to defend a painfully weak plot device. You might be comfortable accepting that, but no one else has to swallow that.

Now, back to your schoolyard nonsense.

 

[Awesome Possum]

Once again, falling back on personal attacks & lies when you have no way of supporting your rickety position is intellectual dishonesty and a gross display of immaturity, as its clear you will post anything to defend a painfully weak plot device. You might be comfortable accepting that, but no one else has to swallow that.

Now, back to your schoolyard nonsense.

Whatever it takes to convince yourself that you're right I guess. You've nothing to prove your position, you just repeat the same assertions over and over and deny what was actually happening on screen because it contradicts and you know it. So continue to insist that you're right and I'm wrong, the movie is wrong, the script is wrong, the actor didn't understand the character like you do, the writers and directors were wrong. It's always everyone else that's wrong, because your fragile ego can't accept anything else. That's why you constantly get caught in these pathetic arguments over your misinterpretations of media. Nearly all of which is subtlety twinged in sexism. I'm really getting tired of taking the small effort to even reply since this isn't a debate, it's you screaming until everyone leaves in disgust.

With that I'm out, I'll talk to the actual adults in this thread.

 

[Turtletrekker]

Once again, falling back on personal attacks & lies when you have no way of supporting your rickety position is intellectual dishonesty and a gross display of immaturity, as its clear you will post anything to defend a painfully weak plot device. You might be comfortable accepting that, but no one else has to swallow that.

Now, back to your schoolyard nonsense.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Spot261]

Once again, falling back on personal attacks & lies when you have no way of supporting your rickety position is intellectual dishonesty and a gross display of immaturity, as its clear you will post anything to defend a painfully weak plot device. You might be comfortable accepting that, but no one else has to swallow that.

Now, back to your schoolyard nonsense.

Sorry dude but that's not what's actually going on here

 

[Refuge]

Well put. The failings you refer to is bad screenwriting 101 to have a character with set personality, motive or beliefs to suddenly become stupid (or develop any other failing) all to justify a conclusion and/or set up a sequel. To refer to Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan again, Spock--without hesitation--sacrificing himself for all others was in character with not only the running themes of the film, but the way his character was developed over the course of the original TV series. His action did not come out of nowhere just to get to that ending--it made sense and respected character development. That's nowhere to be found in the case of Thor, who hits the mission breaks against a foe posing a threat no one in their right mind would underestimate by failing to kill him with a first strike.

I guess it comes down to interpretation too. Like I'm willing to concede that my expectations for character to develop should reflect growth that does not reduce a character, as an example Thor, to always being a meathead. I never thought he was to be honest. The nature of these gods is that they innately possess powers. It's not just a right of succession. The Goddess of Love is alluring. The God of War has the power to fight, the heart to wield weapons meant for him. PLUS he has been a team member in so much capacity over the time, he has grown. That is what I believe and seeing the physical toll it has taken on Thor over the movies I think we were supposed to believe in that. Tactically I'm torn that he didn't seal the deal. To move the plot along he needed to fail You know it would have been the end of the story as such (obviously) but man he had the ability and the weapon to do it. He just needed to stop that bastard from snapping his fingers, lol.

 

[Refuge]

Sorry dude but that's not what's actually going on here

There has been a few personal attacks in this thread. Seriously I'm not mini-modding but just sayin'.

Clearly we had different expectations of our characters and interpretations of what was needed to setup further storytelling.

 

[Spot261]

I guess it comes down to interpretation too. Like I'm willing to concede that my expectations for character to develop should reflect growth that does not reduce a character, as an example Thor, to always being a meathead. I never thought he was to be honest. The nature of these gods is that they innately possess powers. It's not just a right of succession. The Goddess of Love is alluring. The God of War has the power to fight, the heart to wield weapons meant for him. PLUS he has been a team member in so much capacity over the time, he has grown. That is what I believe and seeing the physical toll it has taken on Thor over the movies I think we were supposed to believe in that. Tactically I'm torn that he didn't seal the deal. To move the plot along he needed to fail You know it would have been the end of the story as such (obviously) but man he had the ability and the weapon to do it. He just needed to stop that bastard from snapping his fingers, lol.

Unfortunately Marvel disagree with you and stayed with the character they created and have shown consistently ever since.

 

[Spot261]

There has been a few personal attacks in this thread. Seriously I'm not mini-modding but just sayin'.

Clearly we had different expectations of our characters and interpretations of what was needed to setup further storytelling.

It's not a personal attack, I'm just pointing out how far @TREK_GOD_1 is from actually interpreting this thread correctly, much less the film.